Disposed

Aryaman Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC22 Apr 2024BLAPL/331/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC for offences under Sections 341/323/325/307/34 IPC. Considering detention period, conclusion of investigation, filing of the charge sheet and absence of specific allegation against the petitioner, the court granted bail with conditions including cooperation with investigation and non-harassment of the informant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail of Rs.30,000 with two local solvent sureties on conditions.

Aryaman Naik Vs State of Odisha — Bail and Remand | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No.331 of 2024

Aryaman Naik

.....

Petitioner

Represented By Adv. - Smruti Ranjan Rout

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State Of Odisha

¶8

..... Opposite Party

¶9

Represented By Adv. – A.P.Das, A.S.C.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

22.04.2024

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

¶17

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the Petitioner for bail in connection with Bantala PS Case No.427of 2023, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1738 of 2023 pending in the Court of the learned S.DJ.M., AnguI for alleged commission of offence under Section 341/323/325/307/34 of I.P.C.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that earlier this matter was not before any other Bench of this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is aged about 19 years and he has in custody since 01.12.2023. He further contended that in the meantime investigation has been concluded and

¶19

Page 1 of 3.

¶20

charge sheet has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the allegation made in the F.I.R., further contended that although the injured has sustained grievous injuries however after his treatment he has been discharged from the hospital after preliminary treatment. It was also contended that injured statement has been recorded under 161 Cr.P.C. Referring to the 161 statement of the injured, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the injured has not made any specific allegation against the present petitioner although he has named the present petitioner in his statement. It was also contended that one of the principal accused namely Priti Ranjan Das has been released on bail as a juvenile. In such view of the matter learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail on such terms and conditions as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶21

Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand submitted that the allegation made in the F.I.R. is very serious in nature. The petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. He further contended that there are some antecedents against the present petitioner. He opposed the bail application of the Petitioner on the ground that in the event the Petitioner is released on bail there is a possibility that he might indulge in similar criminal offences. Accordingly, it was prayed that the bail application of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on careful consideration of the surrounding facts as well as materials on record, further taking into consideration the period of detention, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two local solvent

¶23

Page 2 of 3.

¶24

sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin over the matter subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶25

I) he shall not indulge in similar criminal offences;

¶26

II) shall cooperate with investigation;

¶27

III) shall appear before the I.O. as and when required for the purpose of investigation; and

¶28

IV) shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date fixed.

¶29

V) shall not harass threaten and terrorise the informant and his relatives in any manner whatsoever.

¶30

Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶31

BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

¶32

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶33

( A.K. Mohapatra )

Judge

Rubi

Page 3 of 3.

Signature Not Verified

¶38

Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 25-Apr-2024 15:40:04

Aryaman Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aryaman Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Sitaya Vs State of Odisha

Gundupalli Sriram Narayan Vs State of Odisha

Manorama Mishra Vs Anu Garg,I.a.S.

Bela @ Belalsenna Swain @ Belalsen Swain Vs State of Odisha

Shaikh Imran Vs State of Odisha

Rameswar Baiga Vs State of Odisha